It has been stated here many times that the postcode system was devised
purely for Post Office convenience, however, HA5 contains two roads
called Pinner Road at opposite edges, and I can not see why the PO would
have viewed that as convenient when they only had to move one of the
boundaries by 100 yards to put the Pinner Road which straddles the
Northwood boundary entirely into Northwood where it belongs IMO.

While I'm here, the LCC renaming of the 19020s-30s seems to have missed
the fact that there were two Brook Streets in London W. Now that one is
in W1 and the other is in W2, it's not a problem, however, is this the
only case of two roads of the same name in the same 1930s postcode which
the LCC failed to deal with, and if so, I wonder why? Perhaps both had
someone influential living there and they didn't want to upset them.

On 24/09/10 20:24, Basil Jet wrote:

While I'm here, the LCC renaming of the 19020s-30s seems to have missed
the fact that there were two Brook Streets in London W. Now that one is
in W1 and the other is in W2, it's not a problem, however, is this the
only case of two roads of the same name in the same 1930s postcode which
the LCC failed to deal with, and if so, I wonder why? Perhaps both had
someone influential living there and they didn't want to upset them.

Back in the 20's and 30's, surely the postal address would have included
the named locality of London. The purpose of the postal district would
have been to make it easy to sort the letters according to the post
office that handled delivery for that area. The idea that the postcode
would be used to disambiguate similar addresses (rather than just
optimise mail sorting) is far more modern, I think -- some time in the
80's. Prior to that it was the locality that disambiguated and the
postcode just optimised sorting.

On 2010\09\24 23:57, Roy Badami wrote:
On 24/09/10 20:24, Basil Jet wrote:

While I'm here, the LCC renaming of the 19020s-30s seems to have missed
the fact that there were two Brook Streets in London W. Now that one is
in W1 and the other is in W2, it's not a problem, however, is this the
only case of two roads of the same name in the same 1930s postcode which
the LCC failed to deal with, and if so, I wonder why? Perhaps both had
someone influential living there and they didn't want to upset them.

Back in the 20's and 30's, surely the postal address would have included
the named locality of London. The purpose of the postal district would
have been to make it easy to sort the letters according to the post
office that handled delivery for that area. The idea that the postcode
would be used to disambiguate similar addresses (rather than just
optimise mail sorting) is far more modern, I think -- some time in the
80's. Prior to that it was the locality that disambiguated and the
postcode just optimised sorting.

It wasn't the Post Office who renamed the roads, it was the LCC. This
was when "High Street" became "Kensington High Street", jarring with the
station which was already called "High Street Kensington". The post
office might have been happy with multiple High Streets in London W, but
the LCC apparently wasn't.

As I typed that I realised that the signs from the era, such as this
fine example which still has the NE postcode on it,
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll.... 86,,2,-6.23
, don't bear a borough name... here's a presumably older one without
even the postcode letters
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll....1 6,,1,-3.38
.... I would suspect that the LCC might have been responsible for street
name signs at the time, were it not for Hampstead having very
distinctive signs, most of which are still up. Nowadays most street name
signs bear the borough name, although still not in Haringey AFAIK. If
the LCC had been responsible for street name signs, that might have
explained why they felt multiple High Streets in London W was their problem.

I wish there was a web resource distinguishing the styles of street name
sign produced by various bodies in various eras.

On 24 Sep, 20:24, Basil Jet wrote:
It has been stated here many times that the postcode system was devised
purely for Post Office convenience, however, HA5 contains two roads
called Pinner Road at opposite edges, and I can not see why the PO would
have viewed that as convenient when they only had to move one of the
boundaries by 100 yards to put the Pinner Road which straddles the
Northwood boundary entirely into Northwood where it belongs IMO.

I suspect that example is down to postmen's walks and the split
between the Northwood and Pinner delivery offices.

Stuart J

While I'm here, the LCC renaming of the 19020s-30s seems to have
missed the fact that there were two Brook Streets in London W. Now
that one is in W1 and the other is in W2, it's not a problem,
however, is this the only case of two roads of the same name in the
same 1930s postcode which the LCC failed to deal with, and if so, I
wonder why? Perhaps both had someone influential living there and
they didn't want to upset them.

You may just possibly be interested in this potted history of name
changes in London and how to track them. (SWMBO is into genealogy and I
get roped in to search for such things.) It alleges that "the L.C.C.
embarked on a very ambitious plan to eliminate all street name
duplication by means of a massive street re-naming scheme lasting many
decades. Unfortunately, at the outbreak of the Second World War, the
scheme was only just nearing completion,..."

http://www.rayment.info/general/road...roduction.html

--
Robin
PM may be sent to rbw0{at}hotmail{dot}com

In article , (Robin) wrote:

While I'm here, the LCC renaming of the 19020s-30s seems to have
missed the fact that there were two Brook Streets in London W. Now
that one is in W1 and the other is in W2, it's not a problem,
however, is this the only case of two roads of the same name in the
same 1930s postcode which the LCC failed to deal with, and if so, I
wonder why? Perhaps both had someone influential living there and
they didn't want to upset them.

You may just possibly be interested in this potted history of name
changes in London and how to track them. (SWMBO is into genealogy
and I get roped in to search for such things.) It alleges that
"the L.C.C. embarked on a very ambitious plan to eliminate all
street name duplication by means of a massive street re-naming
scheme lasting many decades. Unfortunately, at the outbreak of the
Second World War, the scheme was only just nearing completion,..."

http://www.rayment.info/general/road...roduction.html

At least one change I know about is missing. Mercier Road, SW15 where I
was brought up was once named Amersham Road. When I was young the former
name was given on the street name plates.

It did suffer war damage too. The house next door to my parents' was
demolished and replaced by flats after the war while their house lost its
roof and it was replaced with tiles where the rest of the street had
slates.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 26/09/10 20:21, wrote:

At least one change I know about is missing. Mercier Road, SW15 where I
was brought up was once named Amersham Road. When I was young the former
name was given on the street name plates.

One of the changes mentioned elsewhere in this thread is missing, too --
that of High Street, Kensington becoming Kensington High Street. (The
list includes similar name changes for many other High Streets, but not
that one.)

-roy

On 2010\09\26 20:49, Roy Badami wrote:
On 26/09/10 20:21, wrote:

At least one change I know about is missing. Mercier Road, SW15 where I
was brought up was once named Amersham Road. When I was young the former
name was given on the street name plates.

One of the changes mentioned elsewhere in this thread is missing, too --
that of High Street, Kensington becoming Kensington High Street. (The
list includes similar name changes for many other High Streets, but not
that one.)

The list also doesn't mention Newcourt Street, which still bears signs
saying "New Street".
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll...8. 18,,2,-7.4

On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 08:24:25PM +0100, Basil Jet wrote:
It has been stated here many times that the postcode system was devised
purely for Post Office convenience, however, HA5 contains two roads
called Pinner Road at opposite edges, and I can not see why the PO would
have viewed that as convenient when they only had to move one of the
boundaries by 100 yards to put the Pinner Road which straddles the
Northwood boundary entirely into Northwood where it belongs IMO.

The first part of the postcode is used to direct mail to a local sorting
office. Presumably it was thought appropriate to have the same sorting
office for both roads. The second part of the postcode directs mail to
an individual postie's round, so as long as the second part differs,
there's no problem.

And if the sender forgets to use a postcode, then I would presume that
they're in different post towns.

--
David Cantrell | Cake Smuggler Extraordinaire

The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.
-- attributed by Plato to Socrates

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2010\09\26 20:49, Roy Badami wrote:
On 26/09/10 20:21, wrote:

At least one change I know about is missing. Mercier Road, SW15
where I was brought up was once named Amersham Road. When I was
young the former name was given on the street name plates.

One of the changes mentioned elsewhere in this thread is missing,
too -- that of High Street, Kensington becoming Kensington High
Street. (The list includes similar name changes for many other High
Streets, but not that one.)

That may be 'cos it (allegedly) happened much sooner - in 1912 according
to
http://www.maps.thehunthouse.com/Str...et_Names.htm#H

The list also doesn't mention Newcourt Street, which still bears signs
saying "New Street".
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll...8. 18,,2,-7.4

Is it possible that old sign dates back to the 19th century? The
Metropolitan Board of Works engaged in a good many changes of name
during its tenure.

--
Robin
PM may be sent to rbw0{at}hotmail{dot}com